The Replaces approach is a possibility. But please explain why you think
all the possibilities are invalid.
Paul
Xia, Zhi Feng (Bruce) wrote:
> Given the restrictions in RFC, all four methods seem invalid.
>
> Before we can change the restrictions in the RFC, it looks to me using
> "replaces" is a better approach...
>
> How about this flow:
>
>> Caller Callee
>> | |
>> | |
>> |(1) INVITE with offer |
>> |----------------------------> |
>> | |
>> | |
>> |(2) 183 with answer 1 |
>> |<-------------------------------|
>> | |
>> | |
>> |(3) PRACK |
>> |----------------------------> |
>> | |
>> | |
>> |(4) 200 PRACK |
>> |<------------------------------|
>> |(5) 200 OK |
>> |<---------------------------- |
>> | |
>> |(6) ACK |
>> |---------------------------->|
>> | |
>> |(7)Re-INVITE(replaces with new call id)
>> |<----------------------------|
>> | NOTIFY |
> |----------------------------->
> |BYE(the original call id)
> |----------------------------->
>> | |
>> |(8) 200 OK with SDP |
>> |---------------------------->|
>> | |
>> |(9) ACK |
>> |---------------------------->|
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 2006?10?5? 22:52
> To: Darshan Bildikar
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; 'Retesh Chadha'
> Subject: [Sip] Re: [Sip-implementors] Early media query
>
>
>
>
> Darshan Bildikar wrote:
>> I don't think that even Method 3 and 4 are OK because they will involve a
>> change in the origin line parameter of the SDP and that is not allowed as
>> per the RFC.
>
> Which RFC?
>
> I suport Crister's response.
>
> Paul
>
>> BTW, what was the rationale behind not allowing the origin line to change?
>> It makes implementing apps like prepaid and CRBT very difficult. Could
>> someone please throw some light on this?
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Retesh Chadha
>> Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 5:46 PM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Early media query
>>
>> Hi Udit
>> Of all the methods you have specified, Method 1 and 2 are wrong as per
>> the RFC which states that the sdp of all the provisional and 2xx
>> response of INVITE should be same if they are present.
>>
>> Both Method 3 and 4 look fine, with method 4 being better because in
>> that case 200 ok for INVITE is only sent when the final negotiation
>> (call media) is done.
>>
>> Hope this helps.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
> This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
> Use [email protected] for questions on current sip
> Use [email protected] for new developments on the application of sip
>
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
